9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (6) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ries; (b) confiscated seized goods valued at Rs. 85,129.82 under Rules 173Q but allowed an option for redemption of the goods on payment of a fine of Rs. 20,000/-; and (c) demanded under Rule 9(2) payment of Central Excise duty amounting to Rs. 6,96,800.43 on excisable goods (steel-furniture) cleared during the period 1975-76 to 1979-80. 2. We have heared Shri. V. Sreedharan, Advocate, for the appellants and Shri L.C. Chakraborty, DR, for the respondent. 3. A few undisputed facts may be stated M/s. Jain Industries had an industrial unit at No. 87, Acharya Nagar, Kanpur, where furniture was being manufactured but without the aid of power. M/s. Techmechos had an industrial unit at 55, Industrial Estate, Kanpur, where manufacturing ope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore us by the counsel for the appellants was that this was not the case. It is, therefore, just as well to go into this aspect first. 6. The evidence adduced in support of the Department s allegations are :- (a) an entry in the Gate Entry Register" showing the dispatch, inter alia, of 148 brackets and other parts of steel furniture from the unit at 55, Industrial Estate to that at 87, Acharya Nagar; (b) the statements recorded from Shri Ram Assary, a Rickshaw puller, Shri Bajrang Singh, an employee of the firm and Shri H.K. Sharma, a supervisor of the firm; and (c) the panchnama dated 12-3-1980 which is said to contain an admission by Jain Industries that they had received parts of steel furniture from the Industrial Estate unit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttention to the letter dated 3-12-1971 (page 23 of paper book - I) from Jain Industries to the Assistant Collector. This letter says that though power was not being used in the manufacture of steel furniture, the unit had been covered in the purview of Central Excise since power was being used in the manufacture of steel tubes and engineering items. The unit intended to shift their steel furniture section to an entirely separate premises at G.T. Road, keeping a separate account of that section, and that no power would be used in that section for manufacture of furniture. The letter seeks permission to surrender the Excise licence and request for treatment of the steel furniture manufacturing section as a non-power unit. The licence was surr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion to advance any evidence or Trade Opinion to the effect that these brackets are used as part of steel furniture, it was open to the party to adduce the evidence and to show that these brackets cannot be used as parts of steel furniture. Since they have not adduced any evidence on this point, I do not want to interfere with the allegation framed by the department and hold them as proved. This, it is needless to add, is hardly the way to follow in quasi-judicial proceedings. 9. The statement dated 11-3-1980 of Shri H.K. Sharma, Supervisor, of the Acharya Nagar unit also does not support the Department s case. 10. In our view, all these pieces of evidence put together do not result in the conclusion that the Acharya Nagar unit had be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
